• Maharashtra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    If only people would respond with respectful “I doubt that, but ok”.

    These days, such a response is as scarce as an honest politician.

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    In my experience, the two things that seem to surprise conservatives I’ve talked to are: the constitution is less than 20 pages long, it’s on my phone, and we could read it together in about 30 min (no takers so far), and that there are living redwood trees in California older than Jesus. I don’t know why the second one surprises them so much, but it’s one that seems to consistently elicit surprise.

    • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      11 months ago

      Old trees are such a treasure. It’s a shame that despite their strength they can also be fragile. My house has chestnut floors, easy to find in 1927, but then a blight wipes out 90% of the population. And not to mention us humans but we don’t need to constantly talk about that, except to say it should be our goal to help these things grow for millenia.

  • MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    There was a quote attributed to Lao Tzu I saw on tiktok the other day, and I was pretty damn sure it was nowhere in the Tao Te Ching, but I was curious if there was some weird translation out there I wasn’t aware of.

    The conversation went EXACTLY like this. Like down to the word.

    • OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you look into the original sources, it gets confusing pretty quickly. There’s a bunch of other sources (e.g. the zhuangzi) that assign quotes to Lao Tzu, but they’re probably made up.

      However, Lao Tzu probably didn’t write the Tao Te Ching, so 🤷‍♂️.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laozi

      Basically, by making shit up and saying Lao Tzu said it, tiktok is continuing a long Chinese tradition.

    • Flemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      11 months ago

      One of my favorite things to do with chat gpt is having it rewrite things as Trump. I wasn’t interested in rereading the constitution a second ago, but it’s going to be tremendous, you wouldn’t believe how great it’s going to be

      • funkajunk@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        You know, folks, everyone says I’m the biggest Harry Potter fan, and I have to say, I probably am. I’ve read all the books, all seven of them, and let me tell you, I’ve read them many times. People come up to me and say, “Donald, how do you know so much about Harry?” Well, I just do. I know all about the wizarding world, the spells, everything. Some people might say they’re fans, but I’m the biggest fan, believe me.

        In the magical world, folks, there’s this incredible, absolutely tremendous thing called the Philosopher’s Stone. It’s like pure gold, very, very valuable. You wouldn’t believe how valuable. People are saying it can make you live forever, and let me tell you, that’s a fantastic idea. We need more things like that, don’t we? It’s a winner, folks.

      • GatoB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Well, actually the context is unknown at least for me so I supposed it was a debate. If you instead of attacking someone arguments attack the person it is ad hominen

        • puppy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          How is it ad hominem to ask if they have read the constitution? Here’s the video at https://youtu.be/YVDJqipoohc. Watch from the 50 second mark. The question is on topic and asked as a follow up. Why would you assume the worst without even knowing the context?

          Are you . . . confidently incorrect?

          • GatoB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I dont want to see a 6m video just to prove or not prove a point. I said IF it was a debate and in a quick look it doesnt look like a debate just an interview

            • puppy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              No need to watch the whole video. Watch from the 50 second mark. Will only take 20 seconds from there.

              Even if this was a debate, how is this ad hominem? This being an interview or a debate has nothing to do with it being ad hominem, does it?

              You can interview someone and say “you are an idiot for giving that answer.” Is this fine because it’s an interview, not a debate?

              • GatoB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                The context that I supposed was that they were debating and then he said that, atacking the people instead of the argument makes it ad hominem but I was wrong, it was not that context